Speaker:
Christopher Yeomans
Purdue University

Abstract:

Although existing work draws attention to a range of obstacles in realizing fair AI,

the field lacks an account that emphasizes how these worries hang together in a systematic

way. Furthermore, a review of the fair AI and philosophical literature demonstrates

the unsuitability of ‘treat like cases alike' and other intuitive notions as

conceptions of fairness. That review then generates three desiderata for a replacement

conception of fairness valuable to AI research: (1) It must provide a metatheory

for understanding tradeoffs, entailing that it must be flexible enough to capture

diverse species of objection to decisions. (2) It must not appeal to an impartial

perspective (neutral data, objective data, or final arbiter.) (3) It must foreground the

way in which judgments of fairness are sensitive to context, i.e., to historical and

institutional states of affairs. We argue that a conception of fairness as appropriate

concession in the historical iteration of institutional decisions meets these three

desiderata.

The weekly security seminar has been held every semester since spring of 1992. We invite personnel at Purdue and visitors from outside to present on topics of particular interest to them in the areas of computer and network security, computer crime investigation, information warfare, information ethics, public policy for computing and security, the computing "underground," and other related topics. More info